Skip to content
W Clark Hagan Trust at a glance

· Private foundation

W Clark Hagan Trust

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$37k
Granted FY2025still arriving
2
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$19k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Human Services$164kHealth$102kArts & Culture$66kHousing & Shelter$20kYouth Development$16kEmployment$13kCrime & Legal$2k
02FY2025 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$18,579
Median grant
2
States reached
$754k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
STELLA MARIS INC$18,579
CENTER FOR FAMILY SERVICES INC$18,579
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY18–25, $107k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 85% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%Center for Family Servics Inc: $12k → 14%CENTER FOR FAMILY SERVICES INC: $26k → 14%CENTER FOR FAMILY SERVICES INC: $19k → 12%Three Rivers Youth: $16k → 11%CENTER FOR FAMILY SERVICES INC: $15k → 14%CENTER FOR FAMILY SERVICES INC: $10k → 14%CENTER FOR FAMILY SERVICES INC: $9k → 14%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

71%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$272k · 6 repeat orgs$111k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +65% since the first grant, against +42% for those funded once.

6 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
8

Total granted

$272k
$111k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+65%
+42%

Still filing today

67%
88%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
HealthHuman ServicesCrime & LegalHousing & ShelterOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). The earliest year is left-censored: relationships that predate the data read as new. Theme is the grantee’s IRS cause.

Backed again, and grew

  • CF
    CENTER FOR FAMILY SERVICES
    5× · 2020–2025 · $79k · revenue +69%
  • SM
    STELLA MARIS INC
    2× · 2024–2025 · $34k · revenue +34%
  • DU
    DEPAUL USA INC
    2× · 2023–2024 · $20k · revenue +65%

Funded once

  • GR
    GATEWAY REHABILITATION CENTER
    one grant, 2024 · $21k · revenue +3%
  • TJ
    THE JOHNS HOPKINS HOSPITALgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $18k · revenue +42%
  • VP
    VETERANS PLACE OF WASHINGTON
    one grant, 2022 · $18k
How this is measured

Repeat means funded in two or more distinct years. Growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Pennsylvania Organization for Women in Early Recovery

See schedule o.power's mission is to help women reclaim their lives from addiction and related emotional health issues and improve the well-being of future generations. we provide a range of gender-responsive, trauma-informed drug and…

Health
2
Gosnold Inc

Gosnold, inc. was established for the rehabilitation of substance abusers and offers addiction and mental health treatment on an in-patient and out-patient basis.

—
3
Revive Inc

Empowering individuals on their journey to lasting recovery. our team of dedicated professionals offer a dynamic blend of therapeutic support and personal empowerment. we dont just offer recovery; we provide a roadmap to your vibrant…

Health
4
The Brien Center for Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services

The brien center provides a continuum of care for children, adolescents, adults and families living with significant and persistent mental health and substance use disorders. we are guided by the belief that everyone in berkshire county…

Health
5
Recovery Network of Programs Inc

To provide comprehensive care and expert recovery services to any individual or family on their journey to restore hope, health, and healing; to empower those in need to get the compassionate and personalized support they deserve to help…

Health
6
The Bridge Center Recovery

To provide a safe and structured environment for addicts and alcoholics to come and find hope and restoration.

Human Services
7
Cornerstone Montgomery

Empowering people living with mental health and substance use disorders to thrive in their community through collaboration, treatment, education and advocacy.

—
8
Recovery St Louis
Health
9
Straight and Narrow Inc

Straight and narrow (s&n) develops and delivers quality integrated straight and narrow program, paterson and comprehensive specialized health care, education and prevention services to our community. our experienced and highly qualified…

Health
10
Charlies Place Recovery Center

Alcohol and Drug Rehabilitation

—
11
Davids Hope

To assist individuals recovering from addiction, implement lifestyle changes, gain employment and housing

Health
12
River Bend Recovery

A faith-based, sober living house, for men who are serious about maintaining a life of sobriety from addictive substances.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Gaudenzia Inc; the most unlike its peers is The Johns Hopkins Hospital. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

11 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 11 of the 14 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/11
Grantees still filing
10/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

The Baltimore Inc: $66,340 · OtherThe Baltimore IncThe Baltimore Station Inc: $45,692 · OtherThe Baltimore Station IncPENNSYLVANIA ORGANIZATION FOR WOMEN IN: $27,500 · OtherPENNSYLVANIA ORGANIZATION FOR WOMEN INVETERANS PLACE OF WASHINGTON: $17,500 · OtherVETERANS PLACE OF WASHINGTONCENTER FOR FAMILY SERVICES: $78,711 · Human ServicesCENTER FOR FAMILY SERVICESTHREE RIVERS YOUTH: $16,000 · Human ServicesTHREE RIVERS YOUTHCENTER FOR FAMILY SERVICES INC: $12,000 · Human ServicesCENTER FOR FAMILY SERVICES INCSTELLA MARIS INC: $33,579 · HealthSTELLA MARIS INCGATEWAY REHABILITATION CENTER: $20,687 · HealthGATEWAY REHABILITATION C…THE JOHNS HOPKINS HOSPITAL: $17,580 · HealthTHE JOHNS HOPKINS HOSPIT…GAUDENZIA INC: $12,500 · HealthGAUDENZIA INCDEPAUL USA INC: $20,000 · Housing & ShelterRENEWAL INC: $12,861 · Crime & LegalADDICTION RECOVERY MINISTRY: $1,817 · Crime & Legal
Other$157,032Human Services$106,711Health$84,346Housing & Shelter$20,000Crime & Legal$14,678

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCENTER FOR FAMILY SERVICES: $78,711 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetThe Baltimore Station Inc: $45,692 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetSTELLA MARIS INC: $33,579 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetGATEWAY REHABILITATION CENTER: $20,687 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetDEPAUL USA INC: $20,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetTHE JOHNS HOPKINS HOSPITAL: $17,580 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHREE RIVERS YOUTH: $16,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetRENEWAL INC: $12,861 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetGAUDENZIA INC: $12,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCENTER FOR FAMILY SERVICES INC: $12,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetADDICTION RECOVERY MINISTRY: $1,817 over 1y, 3.2% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

The Bank of America C…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
The Bank of America Charitable Foundation IncNC7.1× affinity4 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization W Clark Hagan Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from W Clark Hagan Trust. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 11%
  • Center for Family Services: 73% of income from government
  • The Baltimore Station Inc: 11% of income from government
  • The Johns Hopkins Hospital: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
1rely on government for over half their income
typical government reliance, FY20–25
How this is measured
Government income is each org’s traced federal awards (USASpending grants and contracts) plus state payments (open checkbooks) as a share of its total revenue (IRS Form 990); the self-reported government-grant line (990 line 1e) is carried for cross-check: a grantee that reports government grants we could not trace to a source is left off the chart rather than shown as receiving none. An association, not a claim that a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than a census; state records exist for 9 states, so a grantee outside them shows no state figure (dimmed) rather than a false zero. Federal award amounts are obligations, which can span years, so a single-year share is indicative. 990 filings lag 12 to 24 months.

On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 14 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

How this is measured
Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears.

Generated from the IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on W Clark Hagan’s filings →

More from the funding graph

The unnamed billions
grants reported with no recipient in the public record
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
The endowment market
who holds foundation money, and what just moved
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home